Add note about faux Open Source nature to README #1431
Conversation
|
Well, it's more like they treat open-sourcing stuff as a nice marketing slogan. @DrKLO pushes squashed "release commits", see #76 (comment) If you want something FOSS-friendly check out https://github.com/slp/Telegram-FOSS. |
|
This is ridiculous. Squashing commits, closing the issue tracker and ignoring pull requests is one thing. Delaying code updates for almost half a year is a whole new level. I'd give the benefit of the doubt, but 4 months makes that hard. |
|
The next level will be remove the repos |
|
Guys, it has finally been updated! |
|
Can we go back to squashed commits and ignored PRs now? |
|
Let's just forger Telegram... It was never good nor secure app. |
|
@mvdan I guess @DrKLO won't give up on those bad haits so easily, but at least we can have Telegram-FOSS updated now. I don't really think all this is good in a long term, though. Durov was deliberately lying about goals and non-goals of Telegram, and this sucks. |
|
See also: Telegram-FOSS-Team/Telegram-FOSS#131 |
|
@ImAle he did promise to break the habit once, but hasn't kept to his word:
And what do we see here? No daily commits, in fact, most commits are "squahed" updates, the repo was abandoned in 2015 https://github.com/DrKLO/Telegram/commits/dev |
|
Maybe we can have a petition to Telegram HQ about being more open about development? Something like Change.org should do. What do you think? |
|
@KamranMackey Today we do, but can you tell for sure the next version won't be closed source again? |
Who is able to examine something like that??? They can hide anything inside it... |
|
What if we create our own "Community Edition" of Telegram for Android? |
See here: https://github.com/Telegram-FOSS-Team/Telegram-FOSS |
|
You are right, so what can we do? |
|
… On Wed, May 31, 2017, 12:58 AM Logerfo ***@***.***> wrote:
***@***.**** commented on this pull request.
What's "Riot"?
—
You are receiving this because you commented.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#1431 (review)>,
or mute the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAiAChrBnIdK7F5Yvw3SjQ-EAMcweRu8ks5r_CkLgaJpZM4MKcTJ>
.
|
|
@user1831 I couldn't come across an updated list of good alternatives, do you know any? Such a list would be very useful in the README file. :) |
|
Just go ask Durov on Twitter, it always helps 🤣 |
|
I have no Twitter's account...could someone asks and reports here the answer? |
|
@Aokromes yes. Fine commit right? Showing 1,972 changed files with 368,915 additions and 197,845 deletions. |
|
Maybe not the best way but, it makes this PR no longer valid. |
|
@Aokromes tbh I feel like it does; a single squashed commit with over 6 months in between can hardly be called open source; and makes it a PITA to manage downstream |
|
I think they should release at least every major release (I mean, x.1.0, x.2.0, x.3.0 etc, like they're doing on Google Play) |
|
There's not a lot to think. Open source means any binary comes with the corresponding source. Any version released with its source is open source, and any version that isn't, isn't. |
|
As soon as @DrKLO loses interest in this project, X will be dead, and there will be no way of continuing this project. Think about it that way. Either communicate with the telegram team to make a decision to take down the "open source" dumping repos, or commit yourself to a way of community development. All you're doing now is sowing suspicion, either accidentally, or justified. |
|
@ShadowJonathan just to clarify, DrKLO isn't the one who works on X. |
Because let's be honest, after over 4 months, it's pretty damn clear Telegram doesn't actually care about Open Source.